Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Things people blamed on bicycles

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 852 posts

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#481

Post by _chu1 »

montebicyclelo wrote: post #114

Cycling is cheap, often faster than driving (in my city), healthy, less noisy, creates vastly less pollution, less dangerous to pedastrians... And I'd guess that about 95% of drivers that I come across are respectful of the danger they present - overtaking with enough space, and not at too high a speed (my city doesn't have great bike lanes). Unfortunately, a typical journey involves passing more than 20 cars, which…

I live in the American suburban/rural spillover, riding a bike is a fever dream, I wish I could but then again it's a tradeoff of not living in any big city of my state (I live in Alabama so I obviously don't have good choices)

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#482

Post by gray_-_wolf »

wongarsu wrote: post #453
gray_-_wolf wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> charging something something But charging is (well, would be, I don't have EV) annoying. I usually fill the gas tank once a month or two and it takes 15 minutes including the trip to gas station. The ~500km distance I get from full tank is enough to cover my car use for a long time. So yeah, having to charge more often, having to find a place to charge at, all of that sounds quite inconvenient and I do not want it.…

People who have a charger at home (even a slow one) seem to usually have the opposite experience: they plug the car in when they arrive home, without having to worry about trips to the gas station. The charging problem is mostly about street-side parking where that doesn't work.

Assuming you own a house or at least a private parking spot and can install a charger there, then yes, I do see the convenience.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#483

Post by neutronicus »

kiliantics wrote: post #457
dageshi wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be honest, the real reason is that cyclists are frustrating to drivers merely by being cyclists. They're slow so they force the driver to either try to overtake or slow down everyone behind them and most people when driving will feel a pressure not to slow down the journeys of others behind them. So long as cyclists and drivers share the same roads it will always exist, some drivers will just be better about it…

The funny thing though is that, in most urban settings, this is completely untrue. Cyclists actually speed things up by creating less traffic. Every cyclist on the road means less cars on the road. And the speed of traffic is not determined by the speed of the cars, which most drivers seem to believe for some reason. In a city, the speed of traffic is entirely determined by the stop signals. There is a fixed time it…

Well, no, for some cyclists the alternative is the bus, not a car

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#484

Post by KineticLensman »

habi wrote: post #383
wkjagt wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another reason is that being really respectful around cyclists is an important part of driving lessons in The Netherlands. And I think you can fail your driving test if you pass a bike too close, open your door without looking if a cyclists is coming from behind, or passing over a bike lane at an intersection without looking. I am from The Netherlands and I only realized since moving to Canada that my home country is…

> open your door without looking if a cyclists is coming from behind, Once you learn about the https://www.dutchreach.org it's hard to forget it. It helps to avoid the not-looking-for-cyclists problem :) (It might even have been here on HN where I learned about it.)

The Dutch Rear has recently been added to the UK Highway Code [0], a mix of legal requirements and suggestions for safe road use.

[0] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#485

Post by dahart »

bsagdiyev wrote: post #315
yrro wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't cyclists -- they are motorists using illegal uninsured vehicles. [In the UK, electrically assisted pedal cycles must cut out after 15.5 mph; the max motor output is 250 W; and the motor must solely be activated by the action of turning the pedals; vehicles that don't comply with these rules are illegal]

This kinda feels like a no true Scotsman, if it walks quacks and flies like a duck it doesn't matter. Edit: I say this a cyclist myself. I see other people on bikes do some dumb shit, we can't say they aren't real cyclists because they do something that makes us look bad.

E-bikes are sometimes tough to reason about because they’re both bicycle and motorized vehicle. This breaks the duck analogy though: they only look like a duck, but they do not quack or walk or fly like one.

I like e-bikes, they are getting more people to ride bicycles, and I’m especially seeing a surge in older people getting out and riding far. This is a good thing for all cyclists. But parent is correct: e-bikes are motorized vehicles. There are bicycle trails where I live where motorized vehicles are not allowed, and that includes e-bikes, and it is enforced.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#486

Post by [deleted] »

aaaaaaaaaaab wrote: post #362
antihero wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just need a way to deal with bike theft. My number one concern is parking my pretty decent bike within view of where I’m sitting or not leaving it unattended for over five minutes. I’m insured, but I have a bond with my wheels! If anyone has recommendations for stealth theft detection/tracking devices I’m all ears.

Easy. Vote for politicians who promise punishing bike theft with multi-year prison sentences. The reasoning is simple: bike thieves disproportionately contribute to climate change by discouraging large-scale bike use. This must be punished.

[deleted]

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#487

Post by gray_-_wolf »

jve wrote: post #480
gray_-_wolf wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when I get home and I have a feeling that next drive might be long and need charge, I plug it in Sure, let me hang down the cable with electricity from the 3rd floor window of the apartment building I live in, that will work great. (Can I even charge the car from regular socket? I would hope yes, albeit slowly I assume.) > You don't have experience so you think how it would be different .. and different is .. bad?…

Not op, but current gas prices in european country: 1,8€/L 43 EUR would buy me 24L at most. And with my car I could travel 184km 70L full tank costs 126€ An economic car would go 430km for 43 EUR

Given that when I tank "full" tank it's usually about 27l, I just did not realize some cars have 70l tanks. I know little about cars :)

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#488

Post by mooselaker »

bsagdiyev wrote: post #315
yrro wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't cyclists -- they are motorists using illegal uninsured vehicles. [In the UK, electrically assisted pedal cycles must cut out after 15.5 mph; the max motor output is 250 W; and the motor must solely be activated by the action of turning the pedals; vehicles that don't comply with these rules are illegal]

This kinda feels like a no true Scotsman, if it walks quacks and flies like a duck it doesn't matter. Edit: I say this a cyclist myself. I see other people on bikes do some dumb shit, we can't say they aren't real cyclists because they do something that makes us look bad.

It doesn't fly like a duck, that's the point. It flies like a cyberduck with a rocket pack.

Cyclists who behave badly are cyclists. People riding vehicles with motors that let them go that fast simply aren't cyclists. We don't call ICE motorcycle riders "cyclists" in that sense either.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#489

Post by adhesive_wombat »

OrderlyTiamat wrote: post #473
diarmuidc wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it's not irrelevant. If helmet wearing is linked to higher per capita head injuries, mandatory helmet wearing should be discouraged.

That depends on the way it is linked. If it's linked causally in the opposite direction, your advice is quite dangerous. Meaning that if higher per capita head injuries are causing more helmet wearing in sub populations (maybe because they see more news about deadly injuries), than your advice is for people in those sub populations to not wear their helmets. So it's relevant information, but the direct effect of "wea…

Indeed: A bit like how wearing a flak jacket is correlated with being shot, and use of scuba tanks are correlated with drowning underwater.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#490

Post by solardev »

antihero wrote: post #310
DoubleFree wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem of dangerous interactions between drivers and cyclists is much smaller here in the Netherlands, mainly due to two reasons. The first reason is the infrastructure, both visible and invisible. Separated bicycle lanes are commonplace and in the few places where they intersect with car traffic, care is taken to make crossing safe and comfortable. This visible infrastructure is complemented by the concept of "…

Just need a way to deal with bike theft. My number one concern is parking my pretty decent bike within view of where I’m sitting or not leaving it unattended for over five minutes. I’m insured, but I have a bond with my wheels! If anyone has recommendations for stealth theft detection/tracking devices I’m all ears.

These are great, light u-lock style frame locks made of titanium: https://tigrlock.com/

Your wheels and components might still get stolen, but not much is really going to stop that. You can add a cable lock if you really want to but they're easy to cut through.

Bike registration (https://bikeindex.org/) might help in some circumstances.

But really, insurance is the thing that will cover you. Many renters'/homeowners' insurances will cover theft of bikes too, even when you're away from home, so you don't necessarily need supplemental bike insurance.

The thing about the trackers is that they're for after-the-fact recovery, not deterrent (especially if they're stealth). It's just going to get parted out, so if you're lucky you might recover the frame and not much else.

Post reply on HN